Jhukar phase

"Jarrige (1983), in contrast, had long since pointed out that there were chronological problems with correlating the seals and other artifacts with the Indo-Aryans: "The mi- gration of these [seminomadic] groups [coming from central Asia] would sometimes be traced on maps based on the accidental discovery of certain types of artifacts5—princi- pally metal objects and seals—which could be stylistically associated with the Hissar III C complex." He points out, however, that this complex is now dated to the end of the third millennium B.C. making it contemporary with the Mature Harappan and not later, as was previously thought: "Thus most of these finds must be interpreted in the context of international exchange covering the whole of the Middle East and cannot be interpreted as reflecting the invasion of pastoralists in the mid-2nd millennium BC" (42)."

"Jarrige (1973) complains of the tendency of lumping everything not typically Harappan under the rubric of the Jhukar culture, "a problem which is further complicated when, by attempting to harmonize the archaeological data with philological arguments, people have developed the habit of attributing to the Jhukar culture all discoveries amenable of offering some correlation with the Iranian world and Central Asia" (263). Jarrige goes on to consider whether there was a disruption of sedentary urban life in the Indus Valley and a sudden drop in agricultural productivity of that area accompanied by a shift to seminomadic pastoralism with evidence of warfare—in short, all of the features that would ideally accompany an intrusion of Indo-Aryan nomads. As the excavator of Pirak, the only well-preserved second millennium B.C.E. site from the area (which he dates from 1700 to 700 B.C.E.), Jarrige (1985) finds a "town" of some size with "elaborate architecture" and evidence of a more intense level of irrigation and cultivation than occurred in the third millennium B.C.E.: "Just the opposite of that which has been presumed on the basis of negative evidence" (46)."

"Even the supposedly alien cultures like those labelled as Jhukar and Cemetery H are regional transformations... from the Harappan civilization itself."

"[Mackay and Piggott] overemphasized this single culture-constituent and treated the Jhukar pottery as signifying an altogether different culture, called Jhukar Culture, with a break between it and the Harappan. That this indeed may not have been the case was often mooted, but has now been categorically established by fresh excavations at Jhukar itself."

"It is thus absolutely clear that: (i) there was an occupational and cultural continuity from the Mature Harappan times to those when the Jhukar-style pottery came into being; and (ii) there is hardly any justifiable case for treating the so-called 'Jhukar Culture’ as an entity quite separate from and having nothing to do with the Mature Harappan."

"From the foregoing analysis of the data from Mohenjo-daro, Jukar, Amri and Chanhudaro it would be seen that the Harappan Civilization was not found dead one fine morning but that in the Sindh region it devolved gradually and got transformed into what is known as the Jhukar Culture."